The argument will fall apart when you inspect it with common sense and simple terms. Tax is anything but "COST" to company. The argument is all about removing such "COST" and convert to "PROFIT GENERATING INVESTMENT". Sound great, but it is anything but playing with sentences.
Let me explain why. Most people think investment is all about "putting money on create new stuff to generate profit", but there is a hidden investment in modern society :
infrastructure investment: education, utilities, road system, regulation, security, law enforcement , etc.
Zero corporation tax advocate selectively skip cost on
infrastructure investment, they keep pretend infrastructure are pop up from nowhere and cost nothing. On the contrast, such infrastructure and bureaucratic are not free, even is not efficient, it is still cheaper than ANY corporation "invest" in such infrastructure.
If all corporation exploit on the collective "infrastructure investment" to generate profits, but nobody pay "cost" (AKA TAX) , then who is going to pay for the such "investment"?
In entrepreneurship, we call the cost that pay to use some other facilities as "rent", which is categorised "cost". OTH, Tax is anything but actually a "rent". Ironically, corporate tax are somewhat "generous" in a way that base on "profit".
Argument may continue and say the "tax"(AKA rent) not justifiable and proportion to the facilities consume. I will say , we are not living in a perfect world.